Yet another unknown motor !

[Graham456]

I won a Keyser bayer pecock 322 class loco with broken outside frame cranks, now having taken it apart to fit Romford or market wheels I found a interesting motor, it looks like a Hornby mark 7 motor,as used in things like the 14xx class, BUT !

this motor is nearly twice the physical size and has a five pole armature, and runs very well, but like the dreadful HM2P it has a built  in plastic gear mount with a axel gear that fits on a D shape axel but the gear has spokes from the boss to the cogged outer rim.

 The motor actually has proper brass bearings unlike the HM2P, so due to madness I am going to use it,as it seams up to it and is controllable 

But who made it ?

sorry no pictures which would help you but my I Pad is twelve years old and failing,being unsupported  more and more  things don’t work,

I might have to stop buying trains and buy a IPad !

[Graham456]

Right have a new I pad let’s see if I can post a picture to help you I D this motor !

 

 

mine is the middle one in this image and it is a five pole  80% bigger in size than the keyser motor

[locomad2]

Almost certain this is a K's motor supplied with the later K's white metal kits in mid 70's

 

Packing was on a thick card with clear plastic so you could check all the parts, a backward step was the frame 6BA bolts were nylon which tended to break years later, never happened with the steel ones, also the nylon axle gear shown in picture tended to split with age.

 

Motor shown didn't last long either the brush holders tended to fall out with loss of carbon brushes, myself replaced the lot with triang X04 motors, tough solid motors, easy to source, repair  and rarely replaced

[hayfield]

Agreed they are the K's HM2P motors, initially produced as a motor, later included an integral motor mount. Probably one of the first of the smaller motors and the company was at the beginning of plastic extrusion models and parts (some far better than others) 

 

They were prone to both the plastic bearings enlarging and or burning themselves out.  A good idea but badly executed, they were produced to a budget which turned out to be too low. However must have sown seeds for future better products. I have never seen one with brass bearings, perhaps a later design of the HP2M with motor mount

 

The D axle was a great idea and should have been easy to assemble in a pre-quartered manner, but many still struggled with them.

[Izzy]

I think that IIRC K’s were at the forefront of plastic wrap sealing of products as with their later kits and went on to develop that side of the business in other spheres. 
 

The main problem with the D axle was that the wheels were moulded in a fairly soft plastic so distortion in the bore and loss of quartering was common and easy to obtain. As with the experiments with the various motors it was all a step forward compared to previous times but always just felt like things never quite ‘got there’.

 

Regarding motors it’s sober to remember this was all a time before the Mashima range  arrived on the scene. We have now returned to that scenario with their demise, witness the efforts now to find suitable decent motors/gearboxes to use in their place that don’t cost a fortune, which many now do. 
 

When you tot up the present day cost of a kit it’s not really surprising many now stick to RTR or converted RTR. I’ve certainly moved that way when in the past I never used RTR at all.

 

Bob

[Flying Pig]

2 minutes ago, Izzy said:

The main problem with the D axle was that the wheels were moulded in a fairly soft plastic so distortion in the bore and loss of quartering was common and easy to obtain. As with the experiments with the various motors it was all a step forward compared to previous times but always just felt like things never quite ‘got there’.

 

 

I was typing exactly that when you posted.  My one experience with a K's kit, circa 1981, also featured moulded-in crankpins, not one of which was perpendicular. To my surprise the chassis did actually run quite well, but the motor ran extremely hot.

[Izzy]

21 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

, but the motor ran extremely hot.

I always got the impression they were all 3/6v ‘toy’ motors that it was hoped might stay the course but generally didn’t, many replacing them with ‘better‘ ones such as the Airfix/MRRC 5 poles. Makes you realise that in general terms we’ve never had it so good in more recent times. 
 

Bob

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, Izzy said:

I always got the impression they were all 3/6v ‘toy’ motors that it was hoped might stay the course but generally didn’t, many replacing them with ‘better‘ ones such as the Airfix/MRRC 5 poles. Makes you realise that in general terms we’ve never had it so good in more recent times. 
 

Bob

J.D. Smith did a motor survey for the EMGS and also the Model Railway Constructor in 1980.

Several letters complaining about these motors (HM2P) in subsequent issues. One even wrote that he had 3 replacements and each was worse than it's predecessor! After that the supplier refused to discuss the problem!

 

You would think that a supplier would check the motor, before providing replacement(s)?

[hayfield]

3 hours ago, Izzy said:

I think that IIRC K’s were at the forefront of plastic wrap sealing of products as with their later kits and went on to develop that side of the business in other spheres. 
 

The main problem with the D axle was that the wheels were moulded in a fairly soft plastic so distortion in the bore and loss of quartering was common and easy to obtain. As with the experiments with the various motors it was all a step forward compared to previous times but always just felt like things never quite ‘got there’.

 

Regarding motors it’s sober to remember this was all a time before the Mashima range  arrived on the scene. We have now returned to that scenario with their demise, witness the efforts now to find suitable decent motors/gearboxes to use in their place that don’t cost a fortune, which many now do. 
 

When you tot up the present day cost of a kit it’s not really surprising many now stick to RTR or converted RTR. I’ve certainly moved that way when in the past I never used RTR at all.

 

Bob

 

Bob

 

When I see RTR locos selling between £200 and £350 in my mind this makes kits very much more affordable. Especially as I do occasionally read about issues with the mechanisms which now unlike older makes cannot easily be repaired

 

Agreed the cost of a kit doubles once wheels motor and gears are taken into consideration, plus the pleasure of building it yourself

 

If you dislike building kits then its a totally different matter, a RTR loco is far more desirable.

 

When I was younger loco kits were far more expensive that a RTR loco, but then the choice was limited and the detail lacking

 

Having bigged up the cost of kits, this can be minimised if one is patient, there is a large retail trade for unmade kits, some of which include wheels motor and gears. I recently paid £65 for a complete (with wheels motor and gears) for a very modern kit where the RRP would be in the region of £200. I guess the same could equally be said of the RTR market ? 

[locomad2]

Interesting to read the replies to this thread, in my teens I started building white metal K's kits and Wills, experience has shown us the Wills kits on standard RTR Chassis have stood the test of time as nearly all were triang or Hornby Dublo. While the K's kits have failed motors, wheels value gear etc.

 

I also have a copy of the Guy Williams ( of Pendon frame) Loco construction in 4mm scale, somwhere he mentions X04 motors as a kind of standard for Pendon stock I tend to agree on that

[hayfield]

6 hours ago, locomad2 said:

Interesting to read the replies to this thread, in my teens I started building white metal K's kits and Wills, experience has shown us the Wills kits on standard RTR Chassis have stood the test of time as nearly all were triang or Hornby Dublo. While the K's kits have failed motors, wheels value gear etc.

 

I also have a copy of the Guy Williams ( of Pendon frame) Loco construction in 4mm scale, somwhere he mentions X04 motors as a kind of standard for Pendon stock I tend to agree on that

 

Locomad2

 

K's kits were produced as complete kits on a budget, Wills initially were designed to fit RTR chassis then later had cast chassis which used expensive (for then) Romford wheels and motors

 

For modellers like myself buying a RTR loco solely to use to power a body kit financially was out of the question. I guess it was the fact that you could buy 2 K's kits for the price of a Wills kit and RTR loco/chassis which was the deciding factor

 

The first series of K's kits even came with transfers, pre quartered wheel sets, and both the original motor then the Mk1 & Mk2 motors were very good. The first series of pre-quartered wheels were quite coarse but were fine for the track standards of the day. The early chassis (stamped key hole axle holes) quite often were slightly bowed, but again worked on the track available at that time

 

When the 80's series arrived the motors were a complete disaster, the wheels (D shaped axles) suffered from ham fisted modellers (like myself) at that time. Once we re-wheeled them it was a different story and in the end even the brass bar chassis gave way to Perseverance etched ones

 

As you say the RTR chassis (Triang and Hornby Dublo) were bullet proof and easily repaired/maintained, but the limited range available affected what kits could be produced, and don't forget K's sold a small body line range which fitted the HD R1 loco

 

However sometimes we look through rose tinted glasses at some RTR products around during the end years of K's production, Airfix & Mainline locos all had issues with their chassis and dont forget the Mazak rot issues suffered by Triang chassis.

 

On the other hand there are plenty of K's kits still running on original chassis, likewise with Triang & HD chassis

 

As for Pendon locos running on X04** motors, perhaps in the early days, they even started using original EM standards of 18mm gauge with the Exmore layout, I have the Roche & Templer book which was also around at that time, but never mentions motors. Guy and Pendon kept up with the times and I guess used the best motors available and would have used 5 pole rather than 3 pole if available

 

** Were they the X04 or Romford Bulldogs or MW/Airfix 005's both of which were 5 pole motors with the same footprint and body design as the X03/4's

Edited July 23, 2023 by hayfield

[Graham456]

plonker alert !

I posted the wrong picture no wonder you kept telling me I had K’s dreadful HP2M I don’t 

I HAVE ONE OF THESE   Why I posted that picture without checking what I had poached off the net thinking that was what I had with out getting the loco out of the to Finnish pile and looking rather than taking a picture of the real thing with my new I Pad and learning how to resize it 

 

[Graham456]

On 22/07/2023 at 11:00, Izzy said:

I always got the impression they were all 3/6v ‘toy’ motors that it was hoped might stay the course but generally didn’t, many replacing them with ‘better‘ ones such as the Airfix/MRRC 5 poles. Makes you realise that in general terms we’ve never had it so good in more recent times. 
 

Bob

 HP2M =Toy motors ! Well my wife calls my trains toys !   😂

personally I still use. MRRC 1001 to replace X04 s if kit built loco from a swap meet uses a Hornby chassis 

thankfull you can still find mashima,s but I don’t know what’s next when I run out 

 

[hayfield]

Grahame

 

I always thought the Airfix MRRC 1001 was the Slimline motor with the double ended shaft, a variant of which was also used in their slot cars, But on checking many were branded 1001, I have also had motors branded Airfix 005 

 

The initially MV made and marketed a model called 005 which soon became the Airfix 005 ( I guess it changed name to the 1001later ) and were the same fitting as the X03/4.  The Romford Bulldog also had the same fitting. Both had 5 pole armatures but different shaped rear fixing lugs and brushes to each other and the Triang 3 pole version

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

On 22/07/2023 at 14:27, hayfield said:

Having bigged up the cost of kits, this can be minimised if one is patient, there is a large retail trade for unmade kits, some of which include wheels motor and gears. I recently paid £65 for a complete (with wheels motor and gears) for a very modern kit where the RRP would be in the region of £200. I guess the same could equally be said of the RTR market ? 

Quite so, patience pays!

 

Especially if you have a long term plan, it is possible to obtain suitable s/h kit and RTR 'feedstock' when a modest price is available, ready for future projects.

 

And while I would be the last to say perfection has been achieved, currently manufactured RTR OO mechanisms - thanks to a hefty transfusion of well developed HO technique, consequent on the transfer of manufacturing to China - generally perform well; and the range of choice is very good. Also I am not concerned for potential longevity issues: 'collectorisation' means there's a heap of pristine spares out there, should they ever be required.

[kevinlms]

On 23/07/2023 at 17:16, hayfield said:

 

Locomad2

 

K's kits were produced as complete kits on a budget, Wills initially were designed to fit RTR chassis then later had cast chassis which used expensive (for then) Romford wheels and motors

 

For modellers like myself buying a RTR loco solely to use to power a body kit financially was out of the question. I guess it was the fact that you could buy 2 K's kits for the price of a Wills kit and RTR loco/chassis which was the deciding factor

 

The first series of K's kits even came with transfers, pre quartered wheel sets, and both the original motor then the Mk1 & Mk2 motors were very good. The first series of pre-quartered wheels were quite coarse but were fine for the track standards of the day. The early chassis (stamped key hole axle holes) quite often were slightly bowed, but again worked on the track available at that time

 

When the 80's series arrived the motors were a complete disaster, the wheels (D shaped axles) suffered from ham fisted modellers (like myself) at that time. Once we re-wheeled them it was a different story and in the end even the brass bar chassis gave way to Perseverance etched ones

 

As you say the RTR chassis (Triang and Hornby Dublo) were bullet proof and easily repaired/maintained, but the limited range available affected what kits could be produced, and don't forget K's sold a small body line range which fitted the HD R1 loco

 

However sometimes we look through rose tinted glasses at some RTR products around during the end years of K's production, Airfix & Mainline locos all had issues with their chassis and dont forget the Mazak rot issues suffered by Triang chassis.

 

On the other hand there are plenty of K's kits still running on original chassis, likewise with Triang & HD chassis

 

As for Pendon locos running on X04** motors, perhaps in the early days, they even started using original EM standards of 18mm gauge with the Exmore layout, I have the Roche & Templer book which was also around at that time, but never mentions motors. Guy and Pendon kept up with the times and I guess used the best motors available and would have used 5 pole rather than 3 pole if available

 

** Were they the X04 or Romford Bulldogs or MW/Airfix 005's both of which were 5 pole motors with the same footprint and body design as the X03/4's

It seems to me that the HP2M motor was a disaster right from when first introduced in mid 1970s? But it would appear that K's had invested plenty of money in them, so determined to keep supplying them, no matter what - depends on what supply contract, I suppose. I guess this is weakness in the idea of a 'complete kit'!

 

I thought that the MW 005 and the Airfix 1001 were exactly the same thing, the MW being in the manufacturers own branded box and the Airfix version, being one branded for them. IIRC neither had any documentation, so hard to say, if there was anything different about them and so they could get put in wrong boxes.

Certainly the survey by J.D. Smith in MRC for May 1980, gives exactly the same ratings for them. This survey also was expanded for the EMGS motor listing in their manual.

 

Both these and the Romford Bulldog, were intended as direct replacements, along with the later ECM3. IMO the ECM3 with the Ultrascale? gears were far superior, but I only had one and it was stolen while on trial in a Tri-ang loco.

[5050]

So, does anyone know what the OP's motor is?  Personally I don't have a clue and I do have several motor adverts etc. from the time.  Perhaps it was a very short lived HP2M replacement as the 'gearbox' looks very similar.

[Graham456]

Perhaps it was a very short lived HP2M replacement as the 'gearbox' looks very similar.

 

you right the front end is very similar to the HP2M with its triangular plastic gearbox and a white spoked plastic gear,

but the motor is a five pole with proper bearings at each end and runs nicely at slow speeds, the gears D shaped axel hole is very Keyser based, if Keyser had put this in the kits not so many of Keyser motors would have ended up in the bin as it’s useable

[russell price]

Just seen this, The OPs motor is the later HP2M replacement, which was supplied from about 1979/80 onwards.  |Easy to build up and get working but for reliabilty best replaced. I have The Ian Allan book written by By Guy Williams who was a user of The Triang XO4 as it was easily available and reliable. No mention of 5 pole upgrades.

[Graham456]

Well I never ! Thank you I never knew the HP2M had a replacement or upgrade of sorts

i thought it might have K’s pedigree from the D shape axel , in 1981 I was still working in a Bristol model shop and the then new stock silver boxed kits still had the useless HP2M in the boxes,and I have never encountered this thing until now,

thanks for the warning about reliability, but mine is going to be used as the finished kit with Romford (markits) runs fine and the armature has brass bearings so it should last longer than the plastic  bearings the HP2M

as for the X04 I am a great user of MMRC /airfix 5poles in my locos that use triang chassis, I even made a Hornsby tender drive Saint loco drive with one, 

Edited March 27 by Graham456

[hayfield]

To a certain Keyser's were ahead of the game in many ways, even with the HP2M motor in its at least 3 variations I have seen, but these were designed and built 40 if not 50 years ago. And probably were the forerunners of the can and coreless motors we now love. I like the plastic 8ba bolts they once supplied for certain uses. Their complete metal kits at a budget price were models most of us cut our teeth on. Now thanks to the likes of HighLevel, Branchlines and Markits, decent motors and gearboxes are now available, its a very different world to the 70's & 80's

 

Since the demise of Mashima motors from China have flooded the market, some are very good, others worse than useless, a whole new range of cheap weak motors are available